More Iraqis flee since troop rise »
Posted by: Alexia 1 year ago145 Comments Report this Story
The number of Iraqis fleeing their homes has soared since the American troop increase began in February, according to data from two humanitarian groups, accelerating the partition of the country into sectarian enclaves.
Read Full Story at iht.com
Join the Discussion 
+ Add Comment
Comments So Far: 145
-
0%
NelsonR1 year ago
If only Americans would, "just think and act", then the Iraqi's would at least have a better world. When you hear Iraqi's saying they were better off under Saddam, doesn't it make you stop and think? How would Americans react if they were dispossessed through fear and intimidation? That is the present state of affairs in Iraq.
Bush/Cheney should be the people on the run in fear of their lives, why should it be citizens being subjugated to misery by your and my leader in the name of "American values". What is our "American values", greed and corruption by the American warmonger elitist.
Reply-
0%
joeblowe1 year ago
Those people are NOT being subjected to fear and terror by us. Please take a moment and READ some information about the conflict. Even just this article. These people are being terrorized by THEIR OWN COUNTRYMEN. It isn't us AT ALL. In fact, we are trying to stop it. They think they were better off under Saddam NOW, but did they like it much when he WAS in control? Not so much? All we did by knocking off Saddam was give them more opportunity to kill and harass EACH OTHER. It wasn't an idea we gave them, they came up with it all on their own. No... these problems are on THEM, not on us.
Reply-
0%
Charlson1 year ago
We destroyed their infrastructure, their police force, their armed forces, and the fragile system that held the Shias and Sunnis from killing each other without replacing or repairing them adequately. And it's not our fault? Are you like Bush who accepts responsibility but not the blame?
Reply -
0%
saintetienne1 year ago
Come on, joeblowe. Stop confusing Nelson with FACTS.
Let Nullson believe his own, twisted, made-up, candy-coated, regurgitated opinions, courtesy of the liberal media.
Reply -
0%
NelsonR1 year ago
joeblowe - So by your hypothesis the Iraq's are better off without Saddam and having the U.S. attempting to control their country? I find that unbelievable that anyone could still believe we are correct with our deciders options.
Iraq needs a strongman for the two distinct religious sides, Saddam was that strongman. We eliminated him. What now? Bush has screwed up the entire middle East with the likes of Lieberman and the Israeli lobbyist who control our foreign policy decisions. We are F^^^d if you know what I mean. Lieberman would have thousands of our troops killed as long as Israel survived without the benefit of all sides, Palestinian and Israeli, ceding on some issues. We are a government of the lobbyist, for the lobbyist and idolize the lobbyist while America flushes down the toilet.
Reply
-
-
0%
augustine9741 year ago
But if we leave Iraq, Dubya said that the 2 million Iraqi's who have fled the country for their lives would turn into "Boat People"., By continuing the carnage, we can make sure that this NEVER happens All Iraqi's must all die in MIddle East with no future and no hope cause We're Nunber One!
Reply
-
-
0%
joeblowe1 year ago
""It is a city of ghosts. The only people left there are terrorists."" - now THIS is good news. If only this were really true, we could simply bomb the city flat and go home.
Reply-
0%
phleghem011 year ago
I think the best argument for our being in Iraq is that it serves as mechanism for concentrating would-be jihadists from around the world. Rather than stopping the influx of people from Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia, ..., we should let the concentration build up a little, then clean it out. Then keep doing that until the ranks of the jihadists are thinned significantly. Don't be suprised if it turns out that the majority of Muslims are jihadists at heart.
Reply-
0%
ETproductions1 year ago
Nice strategy if all the people we are angering into Jihadism would conveniently cooperate and come to Iraq for us to kill them. Unfortunately,n such is not the case. They are flowing into bin Laden's training camps in Pakistan, Going to Afghanistan, and building in numbers throughout the Islamic world, putting severe pressure on friendly governments there.
Reply -
0%
NoWayMan1 year ago
but that totally contradicts bush's initial reasoning on why we went into iraq in the first place: to give the iraqi people freedom, safety and security.
as it is now, bush says we're making iraq safer for iraqis. but he also says we're trying to create a magnet for terrorists so they "attack us there instead of here."
but both of those goals are diametrically opposed, since you can't make a place safer, and more dangerous, at the same time. that just doesn't work, and its more proof that bush is simply full of sh*t when it comes to iraq.
and so far, the strategy of "killing the terrorists" has only created more terrorists, not less. so the ranks of the jihadists will not thin out like you think it will. it will do the opposite. in fact the opposite is already happening.
and the majority of muslims, like the majority of any group over a billion, is most likely made up of moderates. so get a grip. don't be so scared.
Reply
-
-
0%
slate1 year ago
I'd think if the military would warn everyone that anything moving in the deserts between Iraq and other countries would be killed and then send out the apaches the influx of militants would slow. Then we could turn our eye to those left behind, if indeed the problem is mostly insurgents.
Reply
-
0%
skyking2p1 year ago
After all the Iraqies are gone we will have all the oil to ourself. Isn't that what it is all about?
Reply-
-
0%
el-jefe1 year ago
Who are "all the countries"? France? Saudi Arabia? Russia?
Newsflash...the US has "complete possession" of the oil NOW. They have a monopoly of power in Iraq. It is very obvious that the US could radically increase production of oil in Iraq, where they simply willing to kill MANY more Iraqis.
Of course, the US won't do that. They consider themselves to be "civilized", and would never resort to Saddam Hussein's methods to rule the disorganized mess that is now Iraq.
Which is why many of the posts here are so ironic...were the US to rule Iraq as a peace state, the level of death and destruction there would drop overnight (well, in a fortnight, after a certain amount of slaughter). But, no one in Washington ever considered that. After all, wouldn't the Iraqi's welcome the US as liberators, strew flowers in the troop's path, and welcome Chalabi the Thief as their new president?
Reply -
0%
spikecwc1 year ago
"You right but the thing is all the countries will unite and destroy all Americans interests in the middle east before they allow the US to take complete possession of the oil."
No, he isn't, and no, they won't.
Why would the Middle Easterners destroy the only means they have for income?
What a moronic statement.
Reply
-
-
0%
spikecwc1 year ago
"After all the Iraqies are gone we will have all the oil to ourself. Isn't that what it is all about?"
No.
Reply
-
-
-
0%
NelsonR1 year ago
I am laughing hysterically by the suggestion that WE DO have neocons on this site who think OIL should be our motivating factor in continuing the aggressive (Hitler) type war in Iraq. Please, if you are concerned about oil and our longevity in the scheme of things, may I make one little suggestion, ride a bike in the future. Just maybe you will see Bush and Cheney on your bike ride and have the opportune time to spit on them.
Reply-
0%
Jaydee401 year ago
How about finding real alternatives to oil and gas, and not Biofuels that can be exploited by the same A$$Holes who control the oil.
Reply -
0%
el-jefe1 year ago
Western society needs oil to function. Shut off the flow of oil from the Middle East to the US, and several things would happen:
Gas would pass $7/gallon in a heart beat.
A major recession (if not outright depression) would engulf the US economy.
Hundreds of people would freeze to death in northern states in the winter, and many more would perish due to heat exhaustion in the south.
There would be rolling blackouts everywhere, and long lines (stretching for blocks) at the gas pumps, a la 1973 and 1979.
And, most surprisingly to someone like NelsonR, millions of Americans would become surprisingly militant and expansionist about securing sources of energy for America, along with millions of others who would try to blame and persecute the energy industry for the problems. There'd be riots in most major cities, and large parts of the US would become indistinguishable from many 3rd world nations.
Reply-
0%
mivan41 year ago
You, describe alot of damage for less than 10 percent of our oil comes from the middle east! 40% is our own The ramining 60% comes from IN ORDER 1. Canada 2. Mexico 3. Venezuela sp? 4. Saudia Arabia 5-9 small sources such as Kuwait, Iraq and others that are in the middle east and don't account for much.
We also get some from Africa which is the fastest growing exporter of oil over there.
Reply -
HanymanComment removed: User banned.
-
-
-
0%
CORVIDIVS1 year ago
Considering revelations of modern history[ie:let's say the last 300 years]man has shown a marked proclivity for the diversions of war.Huge amounts of economies, time & effort have been directed to more efficiently destroying larger parcels of real estate,and an end to warlike activity is not something that will be enjoyed in the near future should vested concerns realize their goals.
Since the addiction to violent conflict shows no dwindling on any horizon,since so much is invested in this game,why is it that only-a-few-casualties elicits huge outpourings of 'commisseration' from supposed combatant countries' populations that own to an undisputed winning edge in each instance... as if "we meant to go a warring, but THIS is really TOO MUCH'... look at the horrible tragedy of all our fallen...
Reply-
0%
CORVIDIVS1 year ago
MAYBE I'M HINTING that the 'naturally shared' grief that we see in the media is an convenient form of obscene hype to fuel the further prosecution of what might be a dodgey enterprise in the first place.I see it as smarmy bureaucratese P.R. at its worst.Families of the fallen don't need a disproportionate airing of medias jumping in,especially because media have shown a need for such too often in other venues.Don't send flowers...send the press.Armies are made to absorb casualties.Armies are not another glib representation of atari or some hollywood fantasy.You don't fall down dead like sylvester the cat and get right back up again.Violence is for real,& the stakes have been outlined for a very long time.Does one sign up for a lark????
Reply-
0%
CORVIDIVS1 year ago
One would think beating the breast went by the boards with the first versions of homo erectus;
ergo, CONGRATULATING OURSELVES FOR BEING democratic and free smells suspiciously of a sop for the masses in order to assure continuance of a much less democratic chain of events. [where backroom deals and good old boys can continue in infinite impunity as they snub their noses from a self styled heaven.As long as they don't elide throwing us the odd bone to make it all seem to balance out]...
SO LET'S NOT CALL IT war,or a police action, or freedom anymore.Let's un-hype it for what it is: as a failure to be civilized,a failure to communicate,a refusal to see,take responsibility & act... and as a Definite Well Done at murkily sanctioned murder,theft & rape.
INSTEAD, LET'S REFUSE being so blithely romanced any more...
Reply
-
-
-
0%
pcknowledge1 year ago
Oil. Wouldn't it be cheaper for us if we pulled all our troops out of the entire Middle East region? And stopped interfering in their affairs? Then they would sell it to us at fair market value. That would save us billions our government spend on waging wars there, & propping up dictators like Saddam. And if our troops were not stationed in the ME, & we stopped interfering in their affairs, people there would stop seeing us as an enemy who wants their oil for free. As a result, American lifes would be safer here & abroad. I know, someone is going to ask what about Israel? Well, let Israel sort out their own business w/the Arabs. Without our government's support, they would be forced to come with a solution fair to both sides.
Reply-
0%
saintetienne1 year ago
god pcknowsnothing, can you be this stupid?
- "they would sell it to us at fair market value"
HAHAHAHAHAHA!!! The fact that Iraq and the Middle East doesn't understand market economics, democracy and basic human rights are the very reasons we're over there.
- "propping up dictators like Saddam"
Um, I believe we moved into his country, deposed him from power, rooted him out and turned him over to his own people for trial. That's not exactly "propping him up".
- "people there would stop seeing us as an enemy"
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! Are you inSANE?! NEWS FLASH TO PCKNOWLEDGE: Arabs HATE THE WEST. We are not MUSLIMS, therefore we must have our HEADS REMOVED, per Islamic law. Wake UP!
Seriously, pc, you really need to pull your head out of the liberal-spin media and form some opinions for yourself. It's really liberating.
Reply-
0%
NoWayMan1 year ago
iraq and the middle east don't understand market economics?
try and tell that to the saudi prince whose sitting down to take a crap on his golden toilet that you paid for. and this is the same saudi prince, incidentally, whose bank owns your mortgage.
they understand market economics quite well.
you're the one whose doing all the spinning.
spin you crazy con f*ck!! spin!!!
Reply
-
-
